Wednesday, 21 September 2016
We came across comments indicating that a letter was in circulation banning former BNP members - including those who had been Life Members - from attending branch meetings of the British National Party.
Whether this is true or not remains to be confirmed but this leads us straight to the question: what is a public meeting?
Our definition of a public meeting is a gathering not just of party members but also of media representatives and anybody else who want to know what the British National Party is about and therefore banning anybody from attending such meeting runs contrary to the essence of what a public meeting actually is.
On the one hand, there is the nature of a public meeting and on the other is the fact that branch meetings of the British National Party have very low levels of attendance. Nowadays, being able to count more than 20 people in the room would be considered a great success.
It was said at one time that the British National Party was kept alive by its members and activists and that the party could finance its activities thanks to membership fees and small donations. This is no longer the case. Membership numbers dropped from more than 12,000 thousand to less than a 1,000. The reluctance of its present leadership to engage in the political process by taking part in elections can be due to several factors but the fact remains that without taking part in elections the organisation could hardly call itself a political party let alone National since the very nature of a political party is to stand in elections across the country.
Crisis after crisis, regions and branches disappeared and as members were either expelled or simply left of their own volition, the organisation became practically non-operational. In a country with more than 60 million people, at a National Party Conference the British National Party could hardly manage to get more than 150 people in a conference hall. So how could then such an organisation survive from a a financial point of view? Legacies, but legacies are not forever. But no matter how much it cut down the budget, the dramatic fall of membership numbers has not only financial consequences. Political parties are about people and about representing people. Let's look at the numbers.
What happened to monies spent in campaigning? Campaign expenditure for 2015 was Zero, Nil, Nothing. Now, we are talking about a political party. It is inconceivable that a political organisation supposed to be fighting elections didn't have a budget for campaigning. Members of the public donated monies and some of them paid Membership Fees to an organisation but none of the monies donated or paid as membership fees were actually spent in campaigning.
Therefore, we come to the conclusion that the British National Party is the antithesis of what a political party should be. As a political organisation it is practically invisible and making matters worse it shows little interest in fighting elections.
We are just days away from a very notorious by-election in Witney, the now former parliamentary seat of now former Prime Minister David Cameron. The deadline for presentation of candidates is September 26th 2016. Have the public heard about a political organisation called British National Party? It calls itself National but it has less than 1,000 members and it is practically not represented anywhere apart from a few Parish Council seats. It has a Leader and a Deputy Leader both of whom are rarely heard nor seen and spends Zero Pound in campaigning. Let's remind ourselves and everybody else that in 2015 there was a General Election.
This is the reality of the British National Party.
Tuesday, 20 September 2016
US military expenditure........ $585 billion
Russia military expenditure.....$46 billion
This includes military occupation of Japan and Germany that still continues more than 70 years after the end of World War Two.
There is no place for occupation forces in Japan and in Germany. All US forces must be withdrawn from Germany and Japan, not to mention Guantanamo that should be in Cuban hands.
Sunday, 18 September 2016
Reading the 2015 Statement of Accounts of the British National Party some comments made by the British National Party Leader caught our attention.
In the Chairman's introduction, Adam Walker says and I quote: "If you want a political party to efficiently balance the books, a party that doesn't have to borrow billions of pounds every year just to survive and a party that will manage the country's affairs properly, you need to look no further than the BNP".
For fairness sake, I decided to use quotes from the said Chairman's Introduction. In the first place, I would like to know which British political party has had to borrow billions of pounds every year just to survive. Is there a report of the Electoral Commission indicating which political parties have had to borrow billions of pounds every year just to survive.
In the Chairman's Introduction, under the heading Elections, Adam Walker says on the first paragraph: "I am passionate about improving our already formidable election machine." I look at the record of elections and what comes to mind in an election in Burnley in which the British National Party failed to stand because it could not gather the 10 signatures required to stand a candidate in the said election. There is no mention of standing in a election in Jo Cox's parliamentary seat and no mention either of standing a candidate in a by-election called after the resignation of David Cameron as Member of Parliament for Witney.
I was greeted with less than complimentary words by the British National Party Leader Adam Walker when I asked him a very straightforward question: "Is the party going to stand for David Cameron’s seat?"
Where is the British National Party's formidable election machine mentioned by Adam Walker? As far as we know Adam Walker has only been interviewed once since 2014 when he was appointed Leader (Interview carried out by Rod Liddle, a British journalist, and the interview does not seem to appear anywhere). Perhaps somebody would be willing to provide a link to a published interview.
With regards to Europe and the British National Party rapport with other political parties, Adam Walker says and I quote: "We have a great deal of foreign and ex-pat BNP members. We will be re-establishing our links with and responding to the requests of other European Nationalist Parties, providing advice and assistance to help them to organise their own referendums and free their people from the poisonous tentacles of the failed European Union Project."
Now, this sounds terribly ambitious for a political organisation that has no representation in the European Parliament, no representation in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland at parliamentary level and no representation in any major local or regional authority and that has at the most about 1,000 members in a country of more than 60 million people in which other political forces' membership amount to tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands. I don't think that Front National, AfD and other political organisations in Europe that are widely represented will need any advice from the British National Party on the issue of organising a referendum.
On the issue of Immigration, Adam Walker says that "we will introduce a national security moratorium on immigration, stopping all further immigration until the current mess can be sorted out and those here illegally are deported to their country of origin."
Well, all those who might feel threatened or concerned about such statement can sleep soundly because there is no prospect of the BNP having the electoral strength to implement any policy whatsoever.
By the end of the Chairman's Introduction under the heading Report of the Party Officers, Adam Walker says that "I will continue to ensure that the British National Party grows bigger and stronger by the day, and emerge as the only genuine alternative that can provide answers to a broken political system led by a deceitful gang of out-of-touch political parties."
Now let's look at the figures of the 2015 Statement of Accounts.
- In 2014, the party received £324,217 in donations and the figure went down to £240,567 in 2015.
- In terms of membership and subscription fees the party got £130,568 in 2014 and received £80,359 in 2015.
You can calculate the drop in percentages and therefore the image of a party growing bigger and stronger by the day is not reflected by the official numbers provided by British National Party. The amount perceived as legacies that at one point saved the day when the amount perceived in terms of membership fees was falling catastrophically is also falling.
When a politician - and this includes party leaders - make wonderful statements as always the devil is in the detail. The lack of public political profile, falling membership numbers and sheer economics tell you that the British National Party in its present format is going nowhere.
Apart from a one-digit number of seats in Parish Councils, there is no reason why the British National Party could be favourably mentioned anywhere. The thousands of activists mentioned by Adam Walker do not really exist anywhere. Entire regions and branches have been dismantled or are simply on the way out and this is the reality of the British National Party today.
Two-years after a promised "new leadership style", the organisation is foundering and unable or unwilling to fight elections and even if it decided to fight elections the chances of winning are non -existing.
As usual, the British National Party blames Hope Not Hate, the UAF, the mass media and other operators for its extremely poor performances. The sad truth is that it does not have the intellectual power and reputation needed to have even the remotest chance of winning elections in significant numbers. In the absence of substance, empty slogans will not do. Whenever a junior journalist mentions the British National Party in some defamatory article, the organisation not even has the energy or the willingness to stand up and challenge defamation.
Whatever is said, including defamation and libel, sticks as the truth and the situation is made worse by the lack of public political profile of the organisation and of its leadership.
Thursday, 15 September 2016
And the injustices go on and on. BBC presenters are paid seven figure salaries while those who can ill afford to pay the so called TV License are taken to court and even sent to jail.
This is Britain today and the British political system is allowing injustices to continue by maintaining a status quo that damages those who are most vulnerable.
Tuesday, 13 September 2016
Having been Prime Minister and the man of the day, would you like to spend time sitting on the backbenches listening to endless debates? What for? David Cameron is a pragmatic man. He doesn't need to waste his time and he has plenty more things to do that would be a lot more meaningful for him and his family.
The mass media immediately went on the attack talking about pseudo conspiracies and rivalries as the reason for his resignation as Member of Parliament. What a bunch of idiots! David Cameron does not need to work anymore. He doesn't need to put up with tedious politics and silly arguments.
David Cameron has already achieved his political ambitions while many others can only dream with getting to where he has got. Now, it is time to live life to the full without a care in the world.
Nothing new. No one has single-handedly created more conflicts and downgraded the United States of America like Barak Obama.
Luckily there is a date on the calendar in January 2017 when the American people will see the back of Barak Obama.